The URL can be used to link to this page

09-12-17 C/M PacketA G E N D A Council/Manager Meeting Golden Valley City Hall 7800 Golden Valley Road Council Conference Room September 12, 2017 6:30 pm Pages 1. Immigration Discussion (15 minutes)2-37 2. Comprehensive Plan Updates - Economic Competitiveness (15 minutes)38-41 3. Design Standards (15 minutes)42-44 4. Discussion of 2018-2019 Goals and 2018-2019 Budget and Levy (30 minutes)45-52 5. Future of Bicycle and Pedestrian Task Force (15 minutes)53-69 6. Council Review of Future Draft Agendas: City Council September 19, City Council October 3 and Council Manager October 10, 2017 70-72 Council/Manager meetings have an informal, discussion-style format and are designed for the Council to obtain background information, consider policy alternatives, and provide general directions to staff. No formal actions are taken at these meetings. The public is invited to attend Council/Manager meetings and listen to the discussion; public participation is allowed by invitation of the City Council. Executive Summary Golden Valley Council/Manager Meeting September 12, 2017 Agenda Item 1. Immigration Discussion Prepared By Tim Cruikshank, City Manager Summary At the August 8, 2017 Council Manager meeting the Council discussed this item. As a result, Council requested additional information and also directed staff to place this subject on the September 12 Council Manager meeting agenda for further discussion. Additional information provided includes: 1)Memo from City Attorney providing a legal analysis of the ACLU people power model policies that were recommended by the HRC 2)The recommendations from the HRC 3)The ACLU people power model policies 4)Summary of actions from four western suburban communities 5)Resolutions/proclamations from some communities on this topic 6)List of most populated Home Rule Charter cities 7)Educational resources submitted by GV people power 8)Examples of what some cities have done regarding policy/practice language 9)GV Impartial Policing policy with proposed language similar to what some other cities have done If there is further information desired prior to the meeting, please let me know and I will be sure it is provided. Instead of moving ahead with any of the ACLU model policies, staff is suggesting Council either: 1) direct the HRC to create a resolution similar to what other communities have done around inclusivity and diversity to recommend to Council for consideration of approval or 2) concur with staff proposal to amend GV Impartial Policing policy as proposed, similar to what other cities have done. The City Attorney, Police Chief, representatives from the HRC as well as representatives from the GV People Power group will be in attendance Tuesday evening. Attachments •Memo from City Attorney providing a legal analysis of the ACLU people power model policies that were recommended by the HRC (6 pages) •The recommendations from the HRC (1 page) •The ACLU people power model policies (3 pages) •Summary of actions from four western suburban communities (11 pages) •Resolutions/proclamations from some communities on this topic (1 page) •List of most populated Home Rule Charter cities (1 page) •Educational resources submitted by GV people power (1 page) •Examples of what some cities have done regarding policy/practice language (8 pages) •GV Impartial Policing policy with proposed language similar to what some other cities have done (2 pages) BEST&FLANAGAN LLP 60 South Sixth Street,Suite 2700 Minneapolis,Minnesota 55402 TEL 612.339.7121 FAx 612.339.5897 BESTLAW.COM BEST & FLANAGAN; Memorandum DATE: September 6, 2017 TO: Tim Cruiksliank, City Manager FROM: Maria Cisneros, City Attorney RE: Legal Analysis of People Power Policy Recommendations INTRODUCTION You asked me to provide a memorandum summarizing the Golden Valley Human Rights Commission's ("HRC") recommendation to adopt portions of the American Civil Liberties Union ("ACLU") model policies on immigration enforcement ("Model Policies," attached Exhibit A), including the benefits, risks and legal implications for the City of Golden Valley ("City"). I reviewed the recommendations and provide the following summary analysis to help City staff and die City Council evaluate die recommendations. Section I of dhis memorandum analyzes the legality and risks associated with adopting die Model Policies and concludes that the recommended Model Policies are lawful and the City may adopt them if it wishes. However, in deciding whether to adopt the Model Policies, the City should consider the risks they present, and whether any benefit outweighs these risks. These risks include retaliation from die Trump Administration (for example, loss of federal funds); the potential for costly litigation; and the loss of law enforcement tools for the Golden Valley Police Department ("GVPD"). Section II discusses die HRC's suggested changes to the City's existing Impartial Policing Policy (attached Exbibit B) and concludes that the suggested changes are not unlawful; however, they are duplicative and not necessary, and they may be difficult to enforce. BACKGROUND The ACLU, through its People Power platform, has asked the City to adopt nine "model" state and local law enforcement policies and rules. According to the ACLU, the policies and rules "are intended . . . to prevent the discrimination, deportation, and surveillance of immigrant communities."' The HRC met with ACLU representatives and City staff, including members of the GVPD, to review and consider the Model Policies. After its review, the HRC recommended that die Council consider adopting Model Policies one, two and eight. The HRC further recommended that the Council consider amending die City's Impartial Policing Policy by adding "immigration status" to section 113 and adding language to section II that requires federal agents to identify themselves as such when they are inside City facilities. Memorandum Page 2 BEST & FLANAGAN The three Model Policies recommended for adoption read as follows: 1. Policy One: "City of Golden Valley officials shall require a judicial warrant prior to detaining an individual or in any manner prolonging the detention of an individual at the request of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) or Customs and Border Protection (CBP)." 2. Policy Two: "City of Golden Valley officials shall not arrest, detain, or transport an individual solely on the basis of an immigration detainer or other administrative document issued by ICE or CBP witliout a judicial warrant." 3. Policy Eight: "Any person who alleges a violation of this policy may file a written complaint for investigation with [oversight entity]." There is nothing unlawful about these Model Policies. In fact, they are supported by provisions of the U.S. Constitution, which precludes the federal government from requiring the City to expend its local resources to enforce immigration laws.- That said, local authorities can only voluntarily detain individuals longer than they otherwise would pursuant to an immigration detainer request if: (1) the individual is detained for reasonable suspicion of an independent criminal act'; (2) the GVPD receives guidance from federal immigration officers'; and (3) the purpose of the detention is not to allow federal officers to merely investigate the individual's immigration status.' The constitutional boundaries of permissible cooperation with federal immigration officials are not entirely clear and this is a developing area of law.' As discussed below, there are several cases pending in federal courts across the country involving these issues. SECTION I: RISK ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED POLICIES While the Model Policies are not unlawful, they do present some legal risks that the City should consider. This section discusses some of die risks and factors the City should consider in deciding whether or not to adopt the Model Policies. A. Potential for Adverse Action by the Trump Administration Adopting the Model Policies poses the risk that the Trump Administration would label die City a "sanctuary city." Although die term sanctuary city has no legal definition, the Trump Administration has generally used the term to refer to state or local governments that refuse to comply widh ICE detainers, or odhemise inhpede information exchange with federal officials.' Memorandum Page 3 BEST & FLANAGAN On January 25, 2017, President Trump issued an executive order that threatened to withhold federal funding from so called sanctuary cities.' The executive order does not specifically define what kinds of federal funds would be widilield from sanctuary cities, and since die order was issued, several states and cities have sued the federal government arguing that it may not withhold any funds under these circumstances. These cases are making their way through the court system and will likely not be resolved soon.' Given this uncertain climate, adopting the Model Policies while this area of law is unsettled presents a risk of loss of federal funding or other support, as well as becoming involved in costly litigation with the federal government. B. Potential for Litigation As noted above, adopting the Model Policies while this area of law is unsettled creates the potential for the City to become involved in litigation related to die Trump Administration's actions against sanctuary cities. Legal action related to these issues would almost certainly take place in federal court and would likely involve appeals of any district court decisions. The City's involvement in any such litigation would likely be costly. On the odier hand, there are many examples of local governments that have faced the opposite situation, which the Model Policies would prevent: legal action as a result of voluntarily detaining individuals on suspicion of immigration violations or detaining individuals until federal agents can arrive and take custody. Some of the claims brought against public bodies include unlawful detention in violation of the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution' and violation of the Equal Protection clause."' The proposed Model Policies are aimed at reducing this risk by prohibiting City law enforcement from detaining individuals for immigration violations. Even if the City does not adopt the proposed policies, it is important to remember that, while complying with detainer requests is not unlawful, detaining individuals solely on suspicion of civil immigration violations can be unconstitutional." C. Adopting the Model Policies Could Cause the GVPD to Lose Access to Law Enforcement Tools. Adopting the proposed Model Policies will reduce the number of tools available to local law enforcement because it would prohibit the GVPD from voluntarily complying with civil detainer requests even in cases where it would be in the interest of public safety to cooperate with federal agents. Furthermore, adopting policies that explicitly prohibit federal cooperation could discourage other federal autliorities from cooperating with the GVPD. For example, according to Police Chief Sturgis, the GVPD sometimes collaborates with federal law enforcement agencies in drug cases, cases involving crimes committed across jurisdictions, and cases involving violations of federal law. Adopting a policy that prohibits the GVPD from honoring detainer requests could discourage this sort of cooperation and make it harder for GVPD to protect die City's residents. Memorandum Page 4 BEST & FLANAGAN D. Other Considerations The HRC recommends that the City adopt Model Policy eight, which creates a right for individuals to file written complaints against officers who violate the other proposed Model Policies. Policy eight is essentially duplicative of the City's Complaints against Employees Policy ("Complaints Policy," attached Exhibit C), which allows any person to file a complaint based on an alleged violation of a City policy and sets forth the procedure for filing a complaint. The Complaints Policy is required by Minnesota Administrative Rule 6700.2200 and is one of several policies that the Chief of Police is responsible for developing and implementing. Adopting a new policy that overlaps with the Complaints Policy creates the possibility for confusion as to which policy applies to a given circumstance. Rather than adopt a new policy creating a right or process to submit complaints regarding GVPD conduct, the City might instead consider referring to the Complaints Policy. Finally, the likely impact of adopting these Model Policies is limited because the GVPD can only detain individuals for a maximum of sixteen hours. Under the City's Booking and Detention Policy, the GVPD holding facility may not confine adults for more than sixteen hours and juveniles for more than six hours (the "Maximum Holding Period"). After the Maximum Holding Period, the GVPD must either release the individual or transfer them to Hennepin County's custody. The likelihood the GVPD would receive a detainer request from ICE or CBP within the Maximum Holding Period window is low. Additionally, Chief Sturgis reports that he is not aware of the GVPD receiving a detainer request from ICE or CPB in recent memory. This means that the practical impact of the proposed policies, if adopted, is likely to be minimal. SECTION II: SUGGESTED REVISIONS TO THE IMPARTIAL POLICING POLICY The HRC recommends that the Council consider two revisions to existing City policies. Each suggested revision is discussed below. A. Add"Immigration Status"to Section 1B of the Impartial Policing Policy The HRC suggests adding "immigration status" to Section IB of the Impartial Policing Policy, wliicli states: "Except as provided in paragraph (c) officers shall not consider race, ethnicity, national origin, gender, sexual orientation and religion in establishing either reasonable suspicion or probable cause." Adding "immigration status" to the Impartial Policing Policy would increase the risk of the federal government labelling the City as a sanctuary city. Furthermore, this addition would be duplicative, as race, ethnicity, and/or national origin are considered when evaluating an individual's immigration status.12 Memorandum Page 5 BEST & FLANAGAN B. Add a Provision that Requires Federal Officers to Identify Themselves The HRC suggests that the Council consider adding a provision to the existing Impartial Policing Policy to require ICE or CBP officers to identify themselves as federal officers while inside City facilities. This policy does not violate the law; however, there is no clear legal authority for the City to regulate bow federal officials carry out their duties, or to require federal agents to behave in a particular manner wbile in City facilities. If the City does adopt this Policy, enforcement could be difficult. CONCLUSION The proposed Model Policies and revisions to existing City policies are generally consistent witli current law and the City may adopt the Model Policies if it believes they would be beneficial to the City. However,given the uncertain legal climate surrounding these issues, the City should consider the risks as it makes its decision. Additionally, it is important to understand that the constitutional boundaries of permissible cooperation with federal immigration officials are not entirely clear and this is a developing area of law. Whether the City adopts these Model Policies or not, I recommend continuing to monitor current cases for judicial developments that could change die parameters of permissible cooperation or refusal to cooperate witli federal officers. #51349672 Memorandum Page 6 BEST & FLANAGAN ENDNOTES 'According to the ACLU's website,People Power is"a grassroots member-mobilization project"created to"engage volunteers across the country to take action when Trump or his administration attempt to enact unconstitutional policies or trample on people's [sic] constitutional rights." People Power,www.peoplepower.org(last visited Aug.30,2017). '8 U.S.C.S 1252(c) (2016);Arizona v, United States,567 U.S. 387,408-09 (2012) (citing S 1252(c) as an example of the "limited circumstances"under wlucli state and local officers call enforce immigration laws). United States v. Ovando-Garzo,752 F.3d 1161 (8tli Cir. 2014) (holding that all officer acted lawfully when he took a noncitizen into custody pursuant to instructions from CBP). But see Santos v.Frederick Cry.M. ol'Comm'is,725 F.3d 451 (4th Cir. 2013) (holding that officers acted unlawfully when they detained a woman based oil a records check showing a civil immigration warrant without receiving any guidance from federal officials). Orellano v.Nobles Cty., 230 F. Supp.3d 934 (D.Minn. 2017) (holding that detaining an individual so that immigration officers can investigate their civil immigration status is a violation of the Fourth Amendment);Mercado v.Dal]. Cty.,229 F. Supp.3d 501 (N.D.Tex. 2017). 'See, e.g.,Arizona,567 U.S. 387 (striking down all Arizona law that purported to permit state and local officers to arrest individuals on suspicion of immigration violations even though they were not suspected of committing a crime and were not subject to arrest under federal law); Plintz v United States,521 U.S. 898,934 (1997) (striking down a federal law requiring local law enforcement to conduct background checks pursuant to the Brady Act). 'Bryan Griffith&,Jessica Vaughan,Maps:Sanctuary Cities, Counties,and States,Ctr.for Immigration Studies (July 27, 2017), btttns://cis.org/Map-Sanctuary-Cities-Counties-and-States (Sanctuaryjurisdictions are those cities,counties,and states that"have laws,ordinances,regulations,resolutions,policies,or other practices that obstruct immigration enforcement and shield criminals from ICE—either by refusing to or prohibiting agencies from complying with ICE detainers,imposing unreasonable conditions on detainer acceptance,denying ICE access to interview incarcerated aliens,or otherwise impeding communication or information exchanges between their personnel and federal immigration officers."). 'Executive Order:Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States (Jan. 25,2017), littf)s://www.whitelioitse.goi,/tlie-press-office/2017/01/25/presidential-executive-order-enli mncing-public-safety-inteiior- united;see also Memorandum,Implementation of Erecutive Orcler 13768, "Errlrancing Publie Safety in the hrterior ol'the United States"(May 22,2017),haps://i,"vw.i stice.gov/opaa/nressrclease/file/968146/download (issuing clarifications to President Trump's executive order with regard to funding restrictions and the scope of"sanctuary jurisdictions"). See e.g.,Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, California v..5essions,No. 17-cv-4701 (N.D. Cal.Aug. 14, 2017);Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, San Fratrcisco v.Sessions,No. 17-4642(N.D. Cal.Aug. 11,2017); Complaint for Injunctive and Declaratory Relief, Chieago v. Sessions,No. 1:17-cv-5720 (N.D.111.Aug. 7, 2017). 'See, e.g:, Galarza v.Szalczyk,745 F.3d 634(3d Cir. 2014) (holding that local law enforcement may disregard detainers but cannot use them as a defense to unlawful detention claims); Garcia v Speldrich,No. 13-CV-3182 (PJS/LIB),2014 WL 3864493 (D.Minn.Aug. 6, 2014);Mirarxla-Oliwues v. Clackamas Co.,No.3:12-cv 02317-ST, 2014 WL 1414305 (D.Or. Apr. 11, 2014) (holding the county liable for unlawful seizure without probable cause after plaintiff was held based on air immigration detainer);Moi-ales v Chadbourne,996 F.Supp. 2d 19 (D.R.I. 2014) (holding drat plaintiff had been wrongfully detained by law enforcement officials pursuant to two separate immigration detainers). `&e, e.g:, Garcia,2014 WL 3864493. "Md Y See, e.g:,Mentha v. Gareia, 165 F.Supp. 3d 861,889-90 (N.D. Cal. 2016) (holding that defendants were not entitled to qualified immunity as to plaintilt's Fiftli Amendment Equal Protection claim where defendants considered plaintiff's race, ethnicity,and national origin when detennining whether to issue an immigration detainer against plaintiff and conduct air ICE interrogation). citVof, go <*> valley HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION People Power Policy Recommendations for Council 1. The HRC recommends that the council consider adopting ACLU "model policies" number one and number two. • Policy One: "(County/City/State) officials shall require a judicial warrant prior to detaining an individual or in any manner prolonging the detention of an individual at the request of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement(ICE)or Customs and Border Protection (CBP)." • Policy Two: "(County/City/State)officials shall not arrest, detain, or transport an individual solely on the basis of an immigration detainer or other administrative document issued by ICE or CBP without a judicial warrant." 2. The HRC recommends that the council consider adding"immigration status" to the City Impartial Policing Policy under Section 1B. • Section 113: "Except as provided in paragraph (c.)officers shall not consider race, ethnicity, national origin, gender, sexual orientation and religion in establishing either reasonable suspicion or probable cause." 3. The HRC recommends the council consider adopting ACLU "model policy" number eight, memorializing current GV Police practices. • Policy Eight: "Any person who alleges a violation of this policy may file a written complaint for investigation with (oversight entity)." 4. The HRC recommends that the council consider current Impartial Policing policy,which states that officers should follow the guideline: "Introduce or identify yourself to the citizen and state the reason for the contact as soon as practical, unless providing this information will compromise officer or public safety," while reviewing ACLU "model policy" number four. • Policy Four: "To the extent ICE or CBP has been granted access to (County/City/State) facilities, individuals with whom ICE or CBP engages will be notified that they are speaking with ICE or CBP, and ICE or CBP agents shall be required to wear duty jackets and make their badges visible at all times while in (County/City/State)facilities." 3/14/2017 Nine"Model'State and Local Law Enforcement Policies and Rules-Descriptions Nine "Model" State and Local Law Enforcement Policies and Rules - Descriptions PEOPLEiIiPOWER Nine "Model" State and Local Law Enforcement Policies and Rules - Descriptions The 9 "model" state and local law enforcement policies and rules are intended, in short, to prevent the discrimination, deportation, and surveillance of immigrant communities. Below is each of the policies written by ACLU staff along with a short description of each in laymen's terms. #1) The Judicial Warrant Rule:[County/City/State] officials shall require a judicial warrant prior to detaining an individual or in any manner prolonging the detention of an individual at the request of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement(ICE) or Customs and Border Protection (CBP). Rule #1 is meant to stop local police and sheriffs from volunteering to do immigration detention without a judge's approval. Immigration agents routinely ask police and sheriffs to hold people in jail before they have the legal authority to do so. Immigration agents have even asked local police to hold U.S. citizens for immigration purposes, a clear violation of their rights. The ACLU has represented many people who were illegally arrested this way, and it has cost local governments tens of thousands of dollars in court-ordered penalties. By requiring a warrant, we are protecting everyone's Constitutional rights. #2)No Facilitation Rule:[County/City/State] officials shall not arrest, detain, or transport an individual solely on the basis of an immigration detainer or other administrative document issued by ICE or CBP, without a judicial warrant. Rule #2 is meant to help ensure that local police do not spend limited local dollars and staff time carrying out federal immigration work, beyond what is legally required. It also protects against violations of the Fourth Amendment and racial profiling. #3)Defined Access/interview Rule:Unless acting pursuant to a court order or a legitimate law enforcement purpose that is unrelated to the enforcement of a civil immigration law, no [County/City/State] official shall permit ICE or CBP agents access to [County/City/State] facilities or any person in [County/City/State] custody for investigative interviews or other investigative purposes. Rule #3 is meant to stop immigration agents from interfering in local public safety mission. When immigration agents can come to a local facility and do whatever they want, it blurs the line between local police and federal immigration agents, and local communities lose trust in the local police, which harms public safety. #4) Clear Identification Rule:To the extent ICE or CBP has been granted access to [County/City/State] facilities, individuals with whom ICE or CBP engages will be notified that they are speaking with ICE or https://docs.google.com/document/d/lXh-vSGz6Dsnt4yxykgEtngSOhrzOD W 5TM G5R8gogtSk/pub 1/3 3/14/2017 Nine"Moder'State and Local Law Enforcement Policies and RLAes-Descriptions CBP, and ICE or CBP agents shall be required to wear duty jackets and make their badges visible at all times while in [County/City/State] facilities. Rule #4 is meant to ensure ICE officers clearly identify themselves. Sometimes people think they are talking to a public defender- instead, they find out they are talking to an immigration agent. Everyone has the right to remain silent or seek an attorney. Local law enforcement agencies should not assist immigration agents in deceiving immigrants and deprive them of their ability to effectively use their rights. #5)Don't Ask Rule;[County/City/State] officials shall not inquire into the immigration or citizenship status of an individual, except where the inquiry relates to a legitimate law enforcement purpose that is unrelated to the enforcement of a civil immigration law, or where required by state or federal law to verify eligibility for a benefit, service, or license conditioned on verification of certain status. Rule #5 is meant to promote good government, and smart policing. Many local police departments have commonsense policies to protect victims and witnesses that ensure they only ask about immigration status if it's relevant to a state or local crime. This rule keeps our whole community safe by drawing a clear line between local priorities and interference from immigration agencies. #6)Privacy Protection Rule.No [County/City/State] official shall voluntarily release personally identifiable data or information to ICE or CBP regarding an inmate's custody status, release date or home address, or information that may be used to ascertain an individual's religion, ethnicity or race, unless for a law enforcement purpose unrelated to the enforcement of a civil immigration law. Rule #6 is meant to safeguard privacy. ICE officers often call local police and request personal information about people (like home addresses). People deserve to have their private information protected to the maximum extent permitted by law. The rule also protects against targeting people in discriminatory ways - for example, because they are Muslim or Latino. #7) Discriminatory Surveillance Prohibition Rule. No [County/City/State] agency or official shall authorize or engage in the human or technological surveillance of a person or group based solely or primarily upon a person or group's actual or perceived religion, ethnicity, race, or immigration status. Rule #7 is meant to prevent the discriminatory targeting of groups, including using false or weak justifications for doing so. For instance, it would prevent local involvement in the surveillance of a construction worksite for immigration reasons, solely because people of Latino background work there in large numbers. It would prevent the general surveillance of mosques. #8)Redress Rule:Any person who alleges a violation of this policy may file a written complaint for investigation with [oversight entity]. Rule #8 is meant to ensure that every city, town or county has a complaint and redress process for people who have been harmed because of failures to comply with these protections. It would allow your city, county, town to make clear that rules are not just on paper, and something will be done if they are broken. #9) Fair and Impartial Policing Rule:No [County/City/State] official shall interrogate, arrest, detain or take other law enforcement action against an individual based upon that individual's perceived race, national origin,religion, language, or immigration status, unless such personal characteristics have been included in timely, relevant, credible information from a reliable source, linking a specific individual to a particular criminal event/activity. hftps://docs.google.com/document/d/1Xh-vSGz6Dsnt4yxykgEtngSOhrzQDW 5TM G5R8gogtSk/pub 213 3/14/2017 Nine"Model'State and Local Law Enforcement Policies and Rules-Descriptions Rule #9 is meant to promote fair policing, and covers areas including, but not limited to immigration. It is a standard increasingly adopted by law enforcement agencies committed to constitutional and equitable policing. It is a safeguard against biased policing, and it requires that there be specific, non-discriminatory reasons to take police action against a person. Final Note: The Trump Administration has asserted, falsely,that if localities do not help advance Trump's mass deportation agenda,they are violating federal law.The following rule, which is the 2ft applicable federal law in this area, would help ensure your city, county or town establishes its clear intent not to violate federal law. While not a necessary addition, this rule may be a useful complement to the above policies. 1373 Ru/e.Under 8 U.S.C. § 1373 and 8 U.S.C. § 1644, federal law prohibits [County/City/State] officials from imposing limits on maintaining, exchanging, sending, or receiving information regarding citizenship and immigration status with any Federal, State, or local government entity. Nothing in [County/City/State] policies is intended to violate 8 U.S.C. § 1373 and 8 U.S.C. § 1644. 1373 Rule: Is optional, but meant to signal in a clear way that, while your city, county, or town wants to be immigrant-friendly and a "Freedom City," it does not want to violate federal law. Your local leaders can point to this rule to show that your policies are fully consistent with federal law. That would be true even without this rule, but this rule reiterates it. It is like driving 40 mph on a street with a 50 mph speed limit, yet nevertheless calling the police and telling them that you are driving 10 mph less than the limit. Published by Google Drive — Report Abuse — Updated automatically every 5 minutes h"://docs.google.com/documenttd/1Xt, vSGz6Dsnt4yxykgEtngSOhrzQDW5TMG5R8gogtSk/pub 3/3 Cruikshank, Tim From: Steve Devich <SDevich@richfieldmn.gov> Sent: Thursday,August 17, 2017 10:37 AM To: Cruikshank,Tim;Tom Harmening;jay.stroebel@brooklynpark.org; Curt Boganey Subject: RE: immigration, cultural diversity Tim and others: 1) No 2) No 3) No 4) Yes,we have passed an Inclusivity Resolution 5) No Steve Steven L. Devich ( City Manager City of Richfield Tel: (612) 861-9702 1 Fax: (612) 861-9749 sdevich aacityofrichfield.org A great place to thrive �W In From: Cruikshank, Tim [mailto:TCruikshank@goldenvalleymn.gov] Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2017 9:26 AM To: Tom Harmening; jay.stroebel@brooklynpark.org; Curt Boganey; Steve Devich Subject: immigration, cultural diversity All: Could you please indicate if your City has taken action on any of the following: 1) Sanctuary City—is your city officially this? 2) Separation Ordinance—Has your city done this? 3) ACLU model policies—Has your city adopted any of these? 4) Resolution/Proclamation/Statement around supporting diversity, inclusivity,etc...? 5) Other? Thank you! Tim 1 RESOLUTION NO. 11300 RESOLUTION SUPPORTING RICHFIELD AS A SAFE, WELCOMING, EQUITABLE, AND INCLUSIVE COMMUNITY WHEREAS, this November, 2016, we witnessed the end of the most divisive general election in our Country's history. As (the Richfield City Council, the Richfield Human Rights Commission, etc.), we recognize that we have tremendous responsibilities to the people we represent and serve; and WHEREAS, with this resolution we affirm the following commitments to our residents: • We believe in and stand for values of inclusion, equity, and justice. We condemn islamophobia, racism, sexism, xenophobia or hate in rhetoric or action. • We welcome all people and recognize the rights of individuals to live their lives with dignity, free of discrimination and targeting because of their faith, race, national origin, disability or immigration status. • We believe in the public sector for the public good; advancing racial equity and inclusion is critical to the success of our communities and our nation; and WHEREAS, the Richfield Human Rights Commission requests all the Richfield City Council Members sign the resolution; and WHEREAS, there is much work to do in the years ahead. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that we are ready to work together with partners, staff, and residents to create a safe, welcoming, equitable, and inclusive community for everyone. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minne to is 3th day of December, 2016. Jld; eb ie Goettel, Mayor Micha Ho ar , At- ar i Pat, Elliott, Ward 1 Edwina Garcia, Ward G L� Tom Fitzhenry, Ward 3 ATTEST: Elizabeth VanHoose, City Clerk Cruikshank, Tim From: Tom Harmening <THARMENING@stlouispark.org> Sent: Friday,August 18, 2017 10:10 AM To: Cruikshank, Tim;jay.stroebel@brooklynpark.org; Curt Boganey, sdevich@richfieldmn.gov; Nancy Deno Subject: RE: immigration, cultural diversity Hi Tim—Here are my answers: 1) No 2) No 3) No—however elements of the model policies are in our operating policies or practices 4) Yes—adopted in December of 2016 5) Other—We have also been very active in advancing racial equity in our organization. Since January 2016 we have been involved in the race equity initiative sponsored by the LMC and GARE. Since that time all of our staff have received at least the base training on this and all eight departments have created action plans as to immersing racial equity into the programs and services we provide. Last— we have created the position of"Racial Equity Coordinator" and are in the recruitment process right now. If you have questions about our race equity initiative I would encourage you to all Nancy Deno From:Cruikshank,Tim [mailto:TCruikshank@goldenvalleymn.gov] Sent:Thursday,August 17, 2017 9:26 AM To:Tom Harmening;jay.stroebel@brooklynpark.org; Curt Boganey; sdevich@richfieldmn.gov Subject: immigration, cultural diversity All: Could you please indicate if your City has taken action on any of the following: 1) Sanctuary City—is your city officially this? 2) Separation Ordinance—Has your city done this? 3) ACLU model policies—Has your city adopted any of these? 4) Resolution/Proclamation/Statement around supporting diversity, inclusivity, etc...? 5) Other? Thank you! Tim 1 RESOLUTION NO. 16-166 RESOLUTION SUPPORTING AND STANDING WITH ALL MEMBERS OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK COMMUNITY WHEREAS, t e Preamble of the City of St. Louis Park's Home Rule Charter states "Human freedom and human rights are indivisible and Te recognition of equality of all people is indispensable in the administration of a just government. Written documents which govern our nation and state clearly proclaim the rights and responsibilities of the people in making these freedoms possible. It is proper that cities do also, for human rights denied to one are denied to all. We, the people of St. Louis Park, therefore do hereby declare that equality of rights under the law shall not be abridged or denied by the City of St. Louis Park on the basis of color, creed, religion, national origin, gender, marital status, familial status, sexual orientation, age or status with regard to public assistance or disability; and WHEREAS, the city hereby affirms that it does not operate its programs and services for the purpose of enforcing federal immigration laws; and, that public safety officials do not undertake any law enforcement action for the sole purpose of detecting or apprehending undocumented persons. NOW THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that the St. Louis Park City Council supports and stands with all members of the St. Louis Park community. The City Council rejects division, bigotry, hate, and fear. The City Council will fight for the rights, freedoms and interests of all of the members of the community, no matter the color of their skin, their gender, the way they worship, where they were born, their age, their disability, their status regarding public assistance, their marital or familial status, their sexual orientation, or any other identity. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council on December 19, 2016 Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Cruikshank, Tim From: Jay Stroebel <Jay.Stroebel@Brooklyn Park.Org> Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2017 12:43 PM To: Cruikshank, Tim;Tom Harmening; Curt Boganey; sdevich@richfieldmn.gov Subject: RE: immigration, cultural diversity Tim, 1) No 2) No, but our police immigration policy spells this out 3)We have similar language for some of the ACLU policies in our Immigration policy, some of the ACLU policies don't work well relative to federal law 4)Yes, resolution of support for refugees and immigrants Let me know if you want more info. Happy to help. Jay From: Cruikshank,Tim [mailto:TCruikshank@goldenvalleymn.gov] Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2017 9:26 AM To: Tom Harmening; Jay Stroebel; Curt Boganey; sdevich@richfieldmn.gov Subject: immigration, cultural diversity All: Could you please indicate if your City has taken action on any of the following: 1) Sanctuary City—is your city officially this? 2) Separation Ordinance—Has your city done this? 3) ACLU model policies—Has your city adopted any of these? 4) Resolution/Proclamation/Statement around supporting diversity, inclusivity, etc...? 5) Other? Thank you! Tim 1 6 kNI-Q— 7.2A RESOLUTION (PROPOSED) AVC1-PC,-1 VPage RESOLUTION #2017- RESOLUTION DECLARING SUPPORT FOR THE RICH DIVERSITY OF OUR COMMUNITY WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Park is proud of the fact that our community is unique and values and supports all members of our community; and WHEREAS, a significant portion of our community members are immigrants and refugees, some of whom may be targeted because of their ethnicity, race, religion or beliefs. Brooklyn Park has been enriched economically and culturally with each wave of immigrants and refugees; and WHEREAS, our diverse community makes a rich and beautiful tapestry where all the threads of the tapestry are equal in value; and WHEREAS, Brooklyn Park's Core Values include: We believe that everyone has equal intrinsic value, We believe that diversity enriches community, We believe that when a community supports all its members, it thrives; and WHEREAS, the City's vision is "Brooklyn Park is a thriving community inspiring pride where opportunities exist for all"; and WHEREAS, all of Brooklyn Park's residents deserve to live in a safe environment free of fear,violence, hate and discrimination; and WHEREAS, all members of our community contribute every day to the success of the United States of America and the City of Brooklyn Park as residents, U.S. military personnel, police officers, doctors, caregivers, teachers, business owners, volunteers, retirees and in many other roles; and WHEREAS, our nation's founding documents emphasize freedom of religion as one of our nation's fundamental legal and ethical principles. Members of all faiths, religions, races, and backgrounds in our community are welcome in our city, and have the same right to religious freedom as any other person; and WHEREAS, we, as elected representatives of the people, have a special responsibility not to stay silent when any of our constituents face violence or discrimination. We stand against division, bigotry, hate, and fear. We do not tolerate any harmful acts committed against any individual or community and we will advocate for the civil and human rights, freedoms and interests of all of the members of our community, regardless of skin color, gender, ethnicity, religious beliefs, country of origin, sexual orientation, lifestyle preference, economic status or any other identity. NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Brooklyn Park strives to be a united and welcoming community strengthened by the extraordinary diversity of our residents. a tj Q_ `� r 7.213 RESOLUTION FROM THE FEBRUARY 13, 2017 COUNCIL MEETING (� AV\ � k 5 �_% 1 Page 4 � a NOTE:A motion to amend the resolution was made by Council Member Pha and seconded by Mayor Lunde. No vote was taken on the amendment because the agenda item was tabled. RESOLUTION #2017- RESOLUTION DECLARING SUPPORT FOR REFUGEES AND IMMIGRANTS WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Park supports all members of our community including refugees, immigrants, Muslims and all who may be targeted because of their ethnicity, race or religion; and WHEREAS, twenty percent of our community members are immigrants and Brooklyn Park has been enriched economically and culturally with each wave of immigrants and refugees; and WHEREAS, our diverse community makes a rich and beautiful tapestry where all the threads of the tapestry are equal in value no matter what their color; and WHEREAS, Brooklyn Park's Core Values include: • We believe that everyone has equal intrinsic value, • We believe that diversity enriches community, • We believe that when a community supports all its members, it thrives; and WHEREAS, the City's vision is "Brooklyn Park is a thriving community inspiring pride where opportunities exist for all"; and WHEREAS, all of Brooklyn Park's residents deserve to live in a safe environment free of hate and discrimination; and WHEREAS, refugees, immigrants and Muslims contribute every day to the success of the United States of America and the City of Brooklyn Park as elected officials, U.S. military personnel, police officers, doctors, caregivers, teachers, business owners, volunteers, and in many other roles; and WHEREAS, our nation's founding documents emphasize freedom of religion as one of our nation's fundamental legal and ethical principles. Members of all faiths, religions, races, and backgrounds in our community are welcome in our city, and have the same right to religious freedom as any other person; and WHEREAS, the City Brooklyn Park finds the anti-refugee, anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim rhetoric and hate violence to be against American principles of religious freedom and contrary to the vision we hold as a nation that welcomes all people; and WHEREAS, we, as elected representatives of the people, have a special responsibility not to stay silent in the face of discrimination and hate violence against any of our constituents. 7.213 Page 5 NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Gity Of BFGGI(IYR Pad(StFives te be a United and weleeffling "NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the city of Brooklyn Park stand in supports refugees, immigrants and Muslims. We strive to be a united and welcoming community strengthened by the extraordinary diversity of our residents." We stand against division, bigotry, hate, and fear. We do not tolerate discrimination, hate speech or violent acts committed against any individual or community. We will advocate for the civil and human rights, freedoms and interests of all of the members of our community, regardless of skin color, gender, ethnicity, religious beliefs, country of origin, sexual orientation, lifestyle preference, economic status or any other identity. Cruikshank, Tim From: Curt Boganey <cboganey@ci.brooklyn-center.mn.us> Sent: Monday, August 21, 2017 11:42 AM To: Cruikshank, Tim Subject: RE: immigration, cultural diversity Hello Tim, See responses below. From: Cruikshank,Tim [mailto:TCruikshank@goldenvalleymn.gov] Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2017 9:26 AM To: Tom Harmening; jay.stroebel@brooklynpark.org; Curt Boganey; sdevich@richfieldmn.gov Subject: immigration, cultural diversity All: Could you please indicate if your City has taken action on any of the following: 1) Sanctuary City—is your city officially this? a. No we are not 2) Separation Ordinance—Has your city done this? a. No. 3) ACLU model policies—Has your city adopted any of these? a. No. 4) Resolution/Proclamation/Statement around supporting diversity, inclusivity, etc...? a. The Council has taken several steps in support of Inclusion and Diversity i.e. Our strategic priority of Community Engagement which speaks to the this issue. We hired a consultant to support or Inclusion and Diversity efforts,the staff has been empowered to implement I and D recommendations, including training and outreach. He have employed staff to support inclusive outreach for programs.The Council annually adopts a resolution that acknowledges the diversity of the community and recognizes various ethic holidays and events. We have a Multi-Cultural Advisory Committee which Council members frequently attend. We have two Councii=l members participating in the LMC Racial Equity program for elected officials. I Hope this is helpful. 5) Other? Thank you! Tim 1 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF ETHNIC POPULATIONS AND HERITAGE CELEBRATIONS WHEREAS, the City Council has established a goal to promote the inclusion of all residents in Brooklyn Center's community life by emphasizing opportunities to include all residents in the community's activities and plans; and WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that its cultural composition has changed significantly over the past two decades, with its ethnic population over half of its total population; and WHEREAS, Brooklyn Center is strengthened by the rich cultural diversity of its people, and welcomes individuals of all races, religions, and cultural backgrounds; and WHEREAS, each individual brings a part of his or her own heritage and over time each heritage becomes part of our common heritage, leading us to become a more united people; and WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes the vital contributions ethnic populations have made to the strength and diversity of our community and recognizes their rich legacy of ingenuity, perseverance, and achievement; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the following heritage celebrations and all other heritage celebrations reflected in Brooklyn Center's population are recognized for the purpose of encouraging our citizens to learn more about the history of ethnic populations and how they have contributed to the culture and heritage of our community: February African American History Month March Irish-American Heritage Month March 25 Greek Independence Day April 14 Pan American Day May Asian American and Pacific Islander Heritage Month May Jewish American Heritage Month May 17 (Syttende Mai) Norwegian Constitution Day June Caribbean-American Heritage Month June 6 Swedish National Day September 15-October 15 Hispanic Heritage Month October Italian American Heritage Month October 6 German-American Day November Indigenous American Heritage Month RESOLUTION NO. January 9, 2017 Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon,the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. la COUN?v OF - 044 OtO • WHEREAS, Olmsted County takes pride in being a great place to live, learn, work, and play; and Olmsted County government has a vision of being "A dynamic, world-class County delivering excellence every day" and is committed to a mission of "Providing the foundation of a vibrant community"; and County leaders and staff are committed to providing excellent services for every resident of Olmsted County; and All individuals and families have the right to opportunities that help ensure their health, safety, and ability to contribute to their community and to the success of future generations; and Olmsted County has and will continue to experience significant population growth, and increasing racial and ethnic diversity; and Olmsted County embraces its growing diverse population and recognizes diversity as a tremendous economic and community asset; and An extensive body of research has established that a community's access to an interconnected web of opportunities shapes the quality of life for all; and We believe in creating Health Equity, Social Equity, and Racial Equity as guiding priorities and values: By Health Equity we mean everyone has the opportunity to attain their highest level of health. We utilize the term Social Equity to acknowledge the intersection and compounding effects of key societal issues such as poverty, language, disability, etc., with race and ethnicity. We define Racial Equity as the development of policies, practices and strategic investments to reverse racial disparity trends, eliminate institutional racism, and ensure that outcomes and opportunities for all people are no longer predictable by race. It is essential to understand, identify, and address institutional and systemic barriers which may impede access to opportunities for achieving individual, family, and community health, safety, and well-being; and To truly create opportunity for all, we must work to understand and improve public services through a racial, social, and health equity lens from the very core of the organization outward, focusing intentionally and deliberately towards sustainable structural changes; and A growing number of local jurisdictions across the United States are adopting intentional equity strategies and see equity as an opportunity to enhance our ability to provide high quality services. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE OLMSTED COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS THAT: The time is now to embrace diversity as an asset and commit to just and fair inclusion into One Olmsted, a community in which everyone - individuals, children, youth, elders, and families representing every facet of human difference - can participate and prosper. One Olmsted can only be realized with intentional health, social, and racial equity policies at its core for all publicly delivered services. A health, social, and racial equity lens provides both the direction and means to eliminate disparities, and work together to build a vibrant and opportunity-rich society for all. Dated at Rochester, Minnesota on this 4th day of April, 2017. Resolution 17-30, Kenneth Brown, Chairperson. (-� 4/,/Ic I,- Ckc 2 2 .I 6 8900 St Paul HC 285,068 1 550800 Rochester HC 106,769 1 1 699000 Duluth HC 86,265 1 ~ 274100 Bloomington HC 8289-3 2 27490rooyn a HC75,781 ` 2 � 274700 Plymouth HC 70,576 2 739200 St.Cloud HC 65,842 2 21000 Coon Rapids HC 61,476 2 26200 Blaine HC 57,186 2 275200 Minnetonka HC 9,734 2 27300 St. Louis Park HC 45,250 2 70900 Mankato HC 39,309 2 141600 Moorhead HC 065 2 272500 ichfield 8 2 270100 rookl n Center HC 3 2 851300 Winona HC 27,592 2 20800 Fridley HC 27,208 2 740700 Owatonna HC 25,599 2 500200 Austin HC 24,718 2 629400 White Bear Lake HC 23,797 2 21200 Ramsey HC 23,668 2 660300 Faribault HC 23,352 2 197500 Hastings HC 22,172 2 270300 Crystal HC 22,151 2 21300 Lino Lakes HC 20,216 2 191100 South St. Paul HC 20,160 2 669700 Northfield HC 20,007 2 341500 Willmar HC 19,610 3 191300 West St. Paul HC 19,540 3 20500 Columbia Heights HC 19,496 3 821500 Stillwater HC 18,225 3 240100 Albert Lea HC 18,016 3 271400 Hopkins HC 17,591 3 20100 Anoka HC 17,142 3 250800 Red Wing HC 16,459 3 21700 Ham Lake HC 15,296 3 430400 Hutchinson HC 14,178 3 272600 Robbinsdale HC 13,953 3 421000 Marshall HC 13,680 3 180200 Brainerd HC 13,590 3 80600 New Ulm HC 13,522 3 40100 Bemidji HC 13,431 3 561300 Fergus Falls HC 13,138 3 531300 Worthington HC 12,764 3 Educational resources: Immigrant Legal Resource Center https://www.ilrc.org MinnPost story Aug. 15, 2017 "'It's solid fear': How the impact of Trump's immigration agenda is already being felt in Minnesota" https://www.minnpost.com/politics-policy/2017/08/it-s-solid-fear-how-impact-trump-s- immigration-agenda-already-being-felt-min?utm source=MinnPost+e- mail+newsletters&utm campaign=eb74e578b9- EMAIL CAMPAIGN 2017 08 15&utm medium=email&utm term=0 3631302e9c- eb74e578b9-123344182 Movie "Spare Parts" (2015) (trailer) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8p5mm GJEmQ (description) https:Hen.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spare Parts (film) To help understand life as an undocumented immigrant Based on a true story about students from a primarily Latino high school who won first place over MIT in a robotics competition Available to watch for purchase on YouTube and Amazon c � C/) (-P a( &4f V � Co k') a V Police Department Update:Between August and November 2017,the St. Louis Park Police Department is presenting four sessions to the St. Louis Park City Council regarding the police department's service delivery model, policy and procedures, critical incidents, and council response to critical incidents. Presentations will take place during city council study sessions,which are open to the public.The first session took place August 14; remaining sessions are scheduled for September 25, October 9 and November 13.View more information about the sessions and presentations from past sessions. About the Police Department The mission of the St. Louis Park Police Department is to provide citizens with quality service, professional conduct and a safe environment in which to live,work and learn.We are committed to an active partnership with our community as we work together to solve problems and prevent crime. The department has 55 sworn officers and 17 additional staff members including administrators, support staff, dispatchers,a community liaison and three community service officers. Core Values We believe that service to the public is our reason for being, and we strive to deliver quality services in a highly professional and cost- effective manner. We believe that preventing crime and disorder is the best and most economical law enforcement solution. Mike Harcey We recognize our interdependent relationship with the community we serve, and we are continually sensitive to changing community needs. We believe that ethics and integrity are the foundation of public trust and confidence, and that all meaningful relationships are built on these values. We believe that our employees are the department's greatest resource.As professionals,we continually strive to improve the quality of our skills. Our department's mission,values and goals are, at all times, in harmony with the mission,values and goals of the City of St. Louis Park. Policing Strategies In addition to responding to crime and calls for service,the Police Department concentrates efforts on prevention and resolving quality of life issues that affect the well-being of the community.The department uses a number of operational strategies to deliver police services based on the nature of the incident or problem. For more information, read the Policing Strategies document. Community policing is essential to the success of the St. Louis Park Police Department. Community policing relies on our ability to form partnerships with the community to solve problems and quality of life issues.We also work collaboratively with the community,local, state and federal agencies to enforce state laws and local ordinances. To maintain our strong partnership with the community the St. Louis Park Police Department does not enforce federal immigration laws nor has it ever been our practice to do so. Furthermore,the St. Louis Park Police Department does not intend to ask the immigration status of our community members. We are, however,obligated by federal law to notify federal authorities when a person has been arrested by St. Louis Park police officers for a violation of state or local laws we are tasked to enforce, if the person has a federal detainer,warrant or alert assigned by a federal authority. Stay Connected • Follow us on Facebook • Follow us on Twitter • Watch police department videos on YouTube Crime Map • City of St. Louis Park Crime Map HOME RULE CHARTER CHAP' R 1.NAME,BOUNDARIES,POWERS AND CONSTRUCTION Section 1.00.t'*adb&. Human free&and human rights are indivisible and the recognition of equality of all people is indispensable in the administration of a just government. Written documents which govern our nation and state clearly proclaim the rights and responsibilities of the people in making these freedoms possible. It is proper that cities do also, for human rights denied to one are denied to all. We, the people of St. Louis Park, therefore do herebydeclare that equality of rights under the law shall not be abridged or denied byte qty of St. Louis Park on the basis of race color creed, religion, national origin,gender,marital status, amilial status, sexual orientation, age or status with regau iGT c assistance or isa i1rty. The followmgZ arter is a declaration of the policy of the City of St.Louis Park,Minnesota. Section 1.01.Name and Boundaries. Upon the taking effect of this Charter, the Village of St. Louis Park in the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota shall become a city under the name of the City of St. Louis Park, and shall continue to be a municipal corporation with boundaries the same as they now are established or as they may hereafter be established. Section 1.02. Powers of the City. The City of St. Louis Park: shall have perpetual existence; may sue and be sued; may use and alter its seal at pleasure; may enter into binding contracts; may take by purchase, condemnation, gift, devise or otherwise and hold lease, sell and convey all such real and personal property as its purposes may require,or the transaction of its business may render convenient,within or without the limits of the City; may acquire, construct, own, lease and operate public utilities and render public service of every kind; may grant franchises or licenses for the services which shall be rendered by any owner or operator of a franchise or license; may assess, levy and collect taxes for general or special purposes on all subjects or objects which the City may lawfully tax; may borrow money on the faith and credit of the City and issue bonds or certificates of indebtedness. The indebtedness may be secured by granting a security interest in public utilities or other property owned by the City or any income generated therefrom; may appropriate the money of the City for lawful purposes; may provide for,construct,regulate and maintain public works and local improvements; may levy and collect assessments against real property within the City for local improvements and services; may license and regulate persons, corporations and associations engaged in any occupation,trade or business; Supp.No. 22(07-12) CHTA St.Louis Park City Code Brooklyn Park Police Department Policy Manual Disclaimer: Please;nate this is an internal city document for use of Brooklyn Park police officers only;The language Is consistent with legal terminology. Immigration Violations 413.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE The purpose of this policy is to provide guidelines to members of the Brooklyn Park Police Department for investigating and enforcing immigration laws. 413.2POLICY It is the policy of the Brooklyn Park Police Department that all members make personal and professional commitments to equal enforcement of the law and equal service to the public. Confidence in this commitment will increase the effectiveness of this department in protecting and serving the entire community and recognizing the dignity of all persons, regardless of their immigration status: 413.3 VICTIMS AND WITNESSES To encourage crime reporting and cooperation in the investigation of criminal' activity, all individuals, regardless of their immigration status, must feel'secure that contacting or being addressed by members of law enforcement will not automatically lead to immigration inquiry and/ or deportation.While it may be necessary to determine the identity of a victim or witness,members shall treat all individuals equally and without regard to race,color or national origin in any way that would violate the United States or Minnesota Constitutions. 413.4- ENFORCEMENT An officer may temporarily detain an individual when there are facts supporting a reasonable suspicion that;the individual entered into the United States in violation of a federal criminal law. Federal authorities shall be notified as soon as possible and the detained individual shall be immediately released if the federal authorities do not want the person held.An officer should not detain any individual, for any length of time, for a civil violation of federal immigration laws or a related civil warrant. An officer shall never arrest an individual solely for immigration violations without a warrant or the specific authority from a federal agent. 413.4.1 CIVIL VS. CRIMINAL FEDERAL.OFFENSES An individual who enters into the United States illegally has committed a misdemeanor(8 USC § 1325(a)). Generally, an alien who initially made a legal entry into the United States but has remained beyond whet is a legal period of time has committed a federal civil offense. Reasonable suspicion that a criminal immigration violation has occurred shall not be based on race, color, national origin or any other generalization that would cast suspicion on or stigmatize any person, except to the extent permitted by the United States or 'Minnesota Constitutions. Instead, the totality of"circumstances shall be used to determine reasonable suspicion, and shall include factors weighing for and against reasonable suspicion, Factors that may be considered in determining reasonable suspicion that a criminal immigration violation as,occurred may include, but are not limited to: Copyright Lexipol,LLC 2017/41123,All[tights Reserved, Immigration Violations-I Published whit Permission by Brooklyn park Police Department Brooklyn Park Police Department Policy Manual Immigration Violations (a) An admission that the person entered the United States illegally. (b) Reason to suspect that the person possesses immigration documentation that is forged, altered or otherwise indicative that the person is not legally present in the United States. (c) While a lack of English proficiency may be considered, it should not be the sole factor in establishing reasonable suspicion. When practicable, reasonable effort should be madeto accommodate persons with limited English proficiency. (d) Other factors based upon training and experience. 413.4.2 IMMIGRATION CHECKS Immigration status may be determined through any of the following sources: (a) A law enforcement officer who is authorized by the federal government under 8 USC§1357 to verify or ascertain an "alien's" immigration status (sometimes referred to as a 287(g) certified officer) (b) Immigration and Customs Enforcement(ICE) (c) U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) An officer shall verify from a 287(g)certified officer, ICE or CBP whether a person's presence in the United States relates to a federal civil violation or a criminal violation. If the officer has facts that establish probable cause to believe that a person already lawfully detained has committed a criminal immigration offense, he/she may continue the detention and may request ICE or CBP to respond to the location to take custody of the detained person. In addition, the officer should notify a supervisor at soon as practicable. No individual who is otherwise ready to be released should continue to be detained only because questions about the individual's status are unresolved. An officer is encouraged to forgo detentions made solely on the basis of a misdemeanor offense when time limitations,availability of personnel,issues of officer safety,communication capabilities or the potential to obstruct a separate investigation outweigh the need for the detention. 413.4.3> SUPERVISOR RESPONSIBILITIES When notified that an officer has detained a person and established probable cause to believe the person has violated a criminal immigration offense,the supervisor should: (a) Confirm that the detained person's immigration status was properly verified. (b) Ensure that the detained person is taken into custody when appropriate.Take any additional steps necessary that may include, but are not limited to: 1. Transfer to federal authorities. 2. Lawful arrest for a criminal offense or warrant, 413.5 ARREST NOTIFICATION TO IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT Generally, an officer will not need to notify ICE when booking arrestees at the county jail. Immigration officials routinely interview suspected undocumented aliens who are booked intothe Copyright Lexipol,LLC 2017101123,All Rights Reserved. Immigration Violations-2 Published with pennission by Brooklyn Park Police Department Brooklyn Park Police Department Policy Manual Immigration Violations (c) Address the request and complete the certification or declaration, if appropriate, in a timely manner. I The instructions for completing certification and declaration forms can be found on the U.S. Department of Homeland Security(DHS)website. (d) Ensure that any decision to complete, or not complete, a certification or declaration form is documented in the case file and forwarded to the appropriate prosecutor. Include a copy of any completed form in the case file. Copyright Lexlpol,LLC 2017101/23,AD Rights Roserved, Immigration Violations-4 Published with porrol"on by Brooklyn Park Police, Department HOME CONTACT US FAQ EMPLOYMENT CALENDAR MEDIA I Select Language 7 TEXT SIZE A A A search site 1 Want To Recreation and Parks Residents Business and Development Government News and Events Jobs About Us Home,News-Details Print email Share Is Brooklyn Park a Sanctuary City? RECREATION ;• IL• hII February 1,2017 03:53 PM J To the Brooklyn Park Community: ILast week,President Trump signed an executive order addressing immigration enforcement in the United States, UTILITY BILLING 944 including directives regarding"sanctuary jurisdictions"(sanctuary cities).According to the order,sanctuary jurisdictions are ones that"willfully violate federal law in an attempt to shield aliens from removal from the United States."In addition,the President signed another executive order to temporarily ban immigration from seven specific countries. BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT 11 Since these announcements,members of the City Council and city staff have received dozens of contacts inquiring 11 about the status of the City of Brooklyn Park,relative to these new executive orders.We understand that many AGENDAS residents in our community have questions and concerns.Due to the lack of a clear legal definition of a sanctuary city and the unknown enforcement of these executive orders,cities across the country are uncertain of the application and MEETING impacts of these new executive orders.We have been in conversation with the League of Minnesota Cities and other &MINUTES resource organizations to help us understand the full nature of these new executive orders. Because 20 percent of Brooklyn Park residents are immigrants and they,together with their families,make up a •_I. •M ® significant part of our community,the Brooklyn Park Police Department proactively developed an internal policy to LICEN SES govern employees'actions related to immigration in March of 2016.We value diversity and want to make sure all our police officers operate from the same policy.This policy was developed with input from community members.It can be found on the city's website. rl. Will Here are a couple of common questions I've received relative to this policy and the executive orders: N111 VIP Is Brooklyn Park a sanctuary city? NEIGHBORHOOD The Brooklyn Park City Council has not declared the City as a sanctuary city. The City has,however,adopted policies over the years that are sensitive to how we interact with our diverse population. LOOKUP Have the recent executive orders affected how Brooklyn Park Police officers police our community? No.Brooklyn Park's Police policy on immigration was created prior to these executive orders.There is nothing in the With executive orders that affects the current police policy. n I V V It1 I US Does the Brooklyn Park Police Department ask someone's immigration status? The City of Brooklyn Park has NO authority to enforce federal laws,nor do we have the authority to change or influence them. Police Chief Craig Enevoldsen has repeatedly stressed,"we're not in the business of looking for undocumented immigrants or asking immigration status." However,in certain cases where there is reasonable evidence to believe that a person may pose a danger to the community,and has questionable identification such as multiple passports,this may be a violation of federal criminal law.In such circumstances police may call federal authorities.If.however,someone who does not have docurnentation regarding immigration status is stopped for something like a routine traffic violation,nothing would be reported to immigration authorities. Finally,I completely understand that many of our city's immigrants are experiencing fear and anxiety. Unfortunately, as a municipal government we are left with many of the same questions that you might have.If you have questions or concerns,contact your federal government representatives and other elected officials through the neighborhood info app:https�//qts brooklKnp--E�—rk„ora/neigJ.7 Qrhoodinfo/ We are always open to your ideas on things we can do together as a community and that are within the council's authority.If you are in need of immigration assistance,it is best to contact an experienced immigration attorney as each situation is different.The Immigrant Law Center of Minnesota provides no-cost immigration legal assistance to low-income immigrants and refugees.1-800-223.1368,www.ilcm.org I hope this helps answer your questions.if you have any further questions,please contact myself or your City Council representative. Sincerely, Mayor Jeff Lunde Back TELEPHONE 763-424-8000 FAX 763.493-8391 HOURS III 8:00 A.Il 5:00 P.M. Home Contact Us Teums Of Use Privacy Policy Site Map Plain Language Copyright©2017 Brooklyn Park City Hall 5200 85th Ave„N.Brooklyn Park,MN 55443 R-64�ifle d- .OP -6 , sant-ta - Pr Raseviue stopped short tills #. of becoming the fust Twin:Citties suburb to become a sanctuary c� mututy. But officials stre5ed"thai they want all with nt Ica ty lizjnits to feel free"to seek polpr� Without, that an alrwl their"- T1�eClty` oral passed"arm tion formalizing the policy ofa hibitingfzun3ib . .` pean"statuses un �circumstances. " egsolice not ask,"sald CityManagerrlatTrudgeojn:; has not been formally in the man a _�andolls �p�"`Tina�y acb��tfthetnanutat isn't followed." geon told council"membra his staf€is at wcirk oil a pias to c�nu- mun caatethecitZ'ssiueerityt s"tfiose e camp-Ty withfourof directly!in pacteV Fliers will go to the nine approaches recommended placessuchaosclioolsandapartment by the Ameerican"Civil Liberties uilclingshesaid,andpoliceoffiers Union,he said.The others by and will carry a small format card:#a be large have to do with jurisdictions used"as part oftheir interaction." operating a detention facility,winch A public cansultatiou process the suburb doesn't have. called Imagm Roseville"ended"in The Imagine Roseville process a recommea, 4on'last apring to spurred by the July 20m shooting of becomeam+o formAlsanctuarycitl. Philando Castile in neighboring"Fal•- Dissenters said rite process was conHeights—isn't over,MayorDan backed"only by a gaup of strong-' Roestressed.Thenextstepis apub- willed panic pants iii spas Uc forum on CcL 2 at the city's Caval, sionate views on the subject tsar did where different views will be shared not neeessar ly"reflect a Wider-,Coal- -with citizens,the city's policechief munity co: . and other city staffers. Trudgeon said the difference "A number of things are evolving lttweenformally being a sanctuary and changing with regard to public city and simply adapting a policy,in safety and race,"Roe said,"h clod- the end,was more syn"icthanawt- ingaisisinterventiontrainingforall ging."If we took additional action' police personnel from the chief on like declaring ourselves a sanctuary down." city,"he said,"it would nQt 'tip anpmeasurablediffffereu nh�oivWe Vavld PeWma*651.42S-W39 treat raeir#r stc" VG.P.8.13G < Effective Date: October 17, 2001 Revised: July 2008 Impartial Policing Policy Purpose: This policy is intended to reaffirm our department's commitment to impartial/unbiased policing and to reinforce procedures that serve to assure the public that we are providing service and enforcing laws in a fair and equitable manner to all. Policy: I. Policing._Impartially a. Investigative detentions, pedestrian and vehicle stops, arrests, searches and property seizures by officers will be based on a standard of reasonable suspicion or probable cause in accordance with the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution. Officers must be able to articulate specific facts, circumstances and conclusions that support reasonable suspicion or probable cause for investigative detentions, pedestrian and vehicle stops, arrests, nonconsensual searches and property seizures. b. Except as provided in paragraph (c.) officers shall not consider race, ethnicity, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, immigration status, and religion in establishing either reasonable suspicion or probable cause. C. Officers may take into account the descriptors in paragraph (b.) of a specific suspect(s) based on information that links specific, suspected, unlawful or suspicious activity to a particular individual or group of individuals. This information may be used in the same manner officers use specific information regarding age, height, weight, etc. about specific suspects. II. Preventing erceptions of Biased Policing—Procedural Guidelines In an effort to prevent the perception of biased law enforcement, officer shall utilize the following guidelines: a. Be respectful and professional b. Introduce or identify yourself to the citizen and state the reason for the contact as soon as practical, unless providing this information will compromise officer or public safety. C. Ensure that the detention is no longer than necessary to take appropriate action for though known or suspected offense. d. Attempt to answer any relevant questions the citizen may have regarding the citizen/officer contact, including relevant referrals to other agencies when appropriate. e. Provide your name and badge number when requested, preferably in writing or on a business card. f. Explain and/or apologize if you determine that the reasonable suspicion was unfounded(e.g. after an investigatory stop). �� `"�omdi Policing ommtir�.ity pt�licin is essential to the ,success holden Valley poi IjepItaea�t aintt oustrog°perslip with `cti '� our department does not eafr 'deral itgraHon laws, nor has it lien our pra ise to d iso; Furtherpre� our dpartm' rydte not��.end to ask community member about their i�grato and it not our practxee to ahold individualssolely based on Feder civil immigration deta H vewer;we dpi note y fed al authorities when we arrest'a person !dr v�olati�� state . Ioeal lames ani that person has begin urged with a Feder crime or is the subject ofj.4 detaxne "ich is accompaniedg�y.a warrant;affidavit cif probably cause, r rncival'ci Supervision and Accountability: Supervisors shall ensure that all personnel in their command are familiar with the contents of this policy and are operating in compliance with it. #5165889 Executive Summary Golden Valley Council/Manager Meeting September 12, 2017 Agenda Item 2. 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update - Economic Competitiveness Prepared By Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager Summary Staff will update the City Council on the discussion and feedback received at the Comp Plan Conversation held on September 11, including reaction to the draft Goals and Objectives and any discussion around the key issues examined in the plan: understanding the local economy, developing partnerships, retaining and expanding the existing job base, and using land use regulation to help fill gaps in the business landscape. All Comp Plan elements will be addressed at meetings held throughout the spring and summer: March – Land Use April – Land Use (continued) April – Housing May – Sustainability and Resilience June – Water Resources July – Transportation August – Parks and Natural Resources September – Economic Competitiveness Attachments •Community Feedback Summary (1 page) •Proposed Goals and Objectives for Economic Competitiveness Chapter (2 pages) SUMMARY OF COMMUNITY FEEDBACK Economic Competitiveness – 2040 Comprehensive Plan Comprehensive Plan Conversations – September 11, 2017 Summary The City engaged the community on the topic of Economic Competitiveness in a number of different ways in 2016 and 2017: •Community survey (via telephone) was conducted in 2016 •Comprehensive Plan kickoff open house was held September 19, 2016 •City solicited online comments on the 2040 Comprehensive Plan update •Comp Plan in a Box exercise was promoted for small groups to use The general themes that are emerging are: •Grow the commercial/industrial tax base •Encourage redevelopment of underutilized areas and vacant or obsolete buildings •Strengthen the downtown with new businesses •Allow pockets of retail in neighborhood settings •Support locally-owned and small businesses •Promote development that preserves the character of neighborhoods •Encourage the establishment of “missing” businesses: grocery store, brewery, shared office/business coop, etc. •Prepare station areas for development with the arrival of light rail Comprehensive Plan Kick-Off Open House As community members arrived at the open house, they were given a set of stickers to use at each “station” or chapter of the Comp Plan. Stickers were used by attendees to represent the goals that they feel are most important to them and should be included in the long-term vision for Golden Valley. Top 5 Economic Competitiveness Goals Identified at Open House Sticker Count Encourage high-quality development projects that respect their surroundings and are visually attractive 29 Encourage redevelopment of obsolete, blighted or unsustainable parcels 27 Encourage redevelopment projects that are environmentally sustainable and support active living 23 Protect the existing job base by maintaining major employers 23 Diversify the economic mix of Golden Valley 15 Proposed Goals & Objectives Economic Competitiveness Chapter – 2040 Comprehensive Plan Comprehensive Plan Conversations –September 11, 2017 Goal 1: Understand the Local Business Environment Update and analyze data about Golden Valley’s business and employment environment in order to understand the City’s role in the regional economy and to leverage its competitive advantage. Objectives •Maintain a set of City metrics related to employment, real estate, and economic demographics. •Recognize the City’s position in the regional economy. •Anticipate and adapt to shifts in the business cycle. Implementation Options •Maintain regular economic data and monitor metrics. •Meet periodically with brokers, developers and other experts regarding the local market. •Reach out to local businesses and business groups regarding the economic environment. Goal 2: Develop Economic Partnerships Strengthen relationships with local and regional economic development and business partners. Objectives •Strengthen ties with business groups and entities such as Greater MSP, TwinWest Chamber of Commerce, and the Golden Valley Business Council. •Expand relationships with brokers and developers to understand market conditions. •Develop new and expand existing relationships with economic development partners, such as colleges, non-profits, and lenders, to provide resources that support business growth. Implementation Options •Promote development opportunities in the City to brokers, developers, and Greater MSP. •Participate with economic development partners on business supportive initiatives. •Meet with government, educational, and non-profit entities to identify resources that support investment and business growth. Goal 3: Retain and Expand Existing Job Base Work to accommodate the needs of existing businesses across industries and to support growth and expansion that is compatible with surrounding neighborhoods. Objectives •Strengthen relationships with existing businesses. •Preserve the City’s commercial/industrial base. •Foster business resiliency through economic cycles. •Facilitate business growth and expansion in Golden Valley. Implementation Options Comprehensive Plan Conversations – Transportation – July 10, 2017 2 •Create a “toolbox” of resources available to support local businesses. •Proactively meet with businesses to build relationships. •Ensure infrastructure is sufficient to accommodate business growth. Goal 4: Strengthen Link between Land Use and Economy Examine how the City’s land use plan impacts and can support the larger economic vision by zoning for a variety of types of uses. Encourage high quality redevelopment within targeted districts. Objectives •Articulate redevelopment objectives for key properties and corridors. •Encourage reinvestment and contemporary uses in existing properties. •Ensure redevelopment and reinvestment result in increased value, improve appearance, and meet contemporary needs and standards. Implementation Options •Establish visions and goals for each of the City’s four Redevelopment Districts utilizing ULI’s Redevelopment Ready guide. •Amend the code to allow for greater range of uses within the Light Industrial Zoning District. •Explore the implementation of design standards requiring the use of durable materials, architectural elements, and site amenities. Goal 5: Promote Amenities to Attract Workers Continue to enhance all aspects of the City in order to provide the amenities necessary to attract workers and their families to Golden Valley. Objectives •Offer a balanced and attractive community that includes a full range of housing types and prices, parks and open spaces for recreation, retail and entertainment centers, and good transportation options. Implementation Options •Utilize the Implementation sections of each Comprehensive Plan Chapter to prioritize and initiate key investments across the City. •Develop a communications strategy to promote Golden Valley as a place to live and work. Executive Summary Golden Valley Council/Manager Meeting September 12, 2017 Agenda Item 3. Design Standards Prepared By Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager Summary Staff has been asked to look at the possibility of instituting design standards for a range of new or renovated buildings in Golden Valley. In general, there are three types of design standards that communities commonly employ to manage site design and the appearance of buildings. First, site design standards can be used to regulate the massing of buildings, where they are situated on a property, the minimum amount of open space that must be maintained, the location of parking, etc. Golden Valley uses some of these standards generally through the use of setbacks and height limits in the zoning code, but also more specifically through standards created for the I-394 Mixed Use district to encourage development that is visually appealing and pedestrian-oriented. Second, architectural standards can be used to influence the appearance of structures, including requiring certain features such as windows or dormers on building elevations, regulating the relative proportions of various aspects of discrete parts of the façade, requiring architectural features such as canopies or awnings, or limiting the visibility of rooftop mechanical elements. Golden Valley uses strict architectural standards in the I-394 Mixed Use zoning district and more generally through its mechanical screening requirements in all districts. It also employs limited standards in the R-1 zoning district in the form of the articulation requirement. Third, material standards can be used to ensure that high quality and durable exterior materials are included on building façades. These standards may be limited to restrictions on some types of materials deemed to deteriorate quickly, or they may be more prescriptive, such as requiring certain percentages of various “classes” of materials (Class I – brick, natural stone, glass; Class II – textured concrete block, stucco, precast panels; Class III – EIFS, fiber-cement siding; Class IV – smooth concrete block, concrete tip-up panels, glass block). Golden Valley has limited materials standards but does prohibit the use of “exterior facing materials which tend to rapidly deteriorate or which for any reason are, or tend to quickly become, unsightly. The following are examples of materials which are prohibited by this Section: sand lime brick, concrete brick, unfinished structural clay tile, unfinished sheet metal and exposed unfinished concrete.” The City does not currently regulate allowed building materials by “class” or by the percentage of façade coverage. Any of these standards may be applied differently to distinct parts of a city. Many communities choose to focus their standards on high profile areas—such as commercial corridors or gateway districts—or vary the standards across the city through zoning controls. Often, the same architectural standards that are applied to commercial or office buildings are not applied to single family homes. Additionally, the minimum percentages of the required classes of materials can fluctuate from zoning district to zoning district. With the intentional focus in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan on redevelopment in key districts in Golden Valley, there is an opportunity to expand the limited design standards the City now uses within the I-394 Mixed Use district to other areas or to modify the way in which they are applied. This would increase the number of buildings that provide visual interest and would require the street-level design that “activates” these places for pedestrians and bicyclists. Encouraging high- quality redevelopment is also one of items with the highest level of support identified through the community feedback process in the Economic Competitiveness of the Comprehensive Plan. Oversight of the process would likely necessitate small changes in the way projects are reviewed or permitted, such as requiring the applicant to identify on their plans specific materials proposed to be used and/or by providing samples of materials to the City for approval. Staff is recommending the City expand its current use of design standards by: 1.Updating the list of “durable” materials prohibited for use on exterior facing. 2.Continuing to rely on the standards of the I-394 Mixed Use district as this designation is applied to other nodes or areas across the City upon adoption of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. 3.Developing a classification of building materials and requiring minimum percentages of these classes on selected elevations for all non- R-1 and R-2 zoned properties (these standards would vary zoning district to zoning district as appropriate). Attachments •Table of Design Standards in Other Communities (1 page) Design Standards in Other Communities Community Site Standards Architectural Standards Regulating Material Standards Encourages Class I Class II Class III Class IV Golden Valley Yes –I-394 Mixed Use District (applied to all new buildings and expansions over 10%) Yes –I-394 Mixed Use District (applied to all new buildings and expansions over 10%) Screening of mechanicals Non-durable materials prohibited Coon Rapids Yes –applied to all buildings outside the Low Density Residential districts Massing, façades, roof shapes, focal features, materials and colors Yes –required materials differentiated by zoning district Minnetonka Yes –I-394 District (applied to all new buildings) Yes –I-394 District (applied to all new buildings) Materials, colors, textures, details, screening of mechanicals Yes Brick, natural or manmade stone, glass, architectural metal panels Roseville Yes –Community Mixed Use Districts Yes –applied to new buildings or 50% increase in floor area Entrance orientation, vertical and horizontal articulation, façades, features, finishes Yes –required materials differentiated by zoning district St. Louis Park Yes –applied to all buildings Height, bulk, massing, roof treatment, materials, colors, textures, proportions Yes –3 classes of materials 60%-Class I Not more than 10% - Class III Brick, marble, granite, stone, stucco, copper. Glass, pre- finished metals Concrete panels or blocks, rock face, artificial stucco/stone Unpainted concrete block, panels, or metal Richfield Yes Shape, size, height, façades, materials Yes Wood, brick, stone, glass, cement siding Edina Yes –required materials differentiated by zoning district Brick, stone,textured concrete panels, finished metal frame panel construction, glass Woodbury Yes –applied to all non- residential buildings Ornamentation, materials, colors, screening of mechanicals Yes –4 classes of materials, required materials differentiated by use Brick,natural or cultured stone, glass, copper Specialty concrete block, precast textured concrete or brick panels, masonry stucco, ceramic EIFS, opaque panels, ornamental metal, fiber- cement exterior siding, thin brick veneer Smooth concrete block, smooth scored concrete block, smooth concrete tip up panels, glass block, wood Executive Summary Golden Valley Council/Manager Meeting September 12, 2017 Agenda Item 4. Discussion of 2018-2019 Goals and 2018-2019 Budget and Levy Prepared By Tim Cruikshank, City Manager Summary At the August 8, 2017, City Managers performance evaluation, the Council was presented with a documented titled ‘possible goals for 2018-2019’ for discussion purposes. This item was requested by Council to be further reviewed at the September 9, 2017, Council Manager meeting in relation to the proposed 2018 budget and levy. A brief update will be given on the budget and levy after reviewing the suggested goals. Attachments •Possible goals for 2018-2019 (2 pages) •Total Proposed Levy with New Employee and Tax Impact (2 pages) •Total Proposed Levy ∼Current (1 page) ∼Move Equipment Certificates to General Levy (1 page) ∼Impact on Median Home (1 page) Possible goals for 2018-19 Create a long term debt reduction strategy as well as a fund balance strategy for all CIP funds, especially equipment, buildings, streets, water, sewer and storm water. The long term concept is to reduce current debt to a more reasonable level ($30 million) in as expeditious of a manner as reasonably possible, eliminate debt in as expeditious of a manner as reasonably possible and not issue future debt whenever possible but to use internal funds for loans and/or to pay as we go. IMMEDIATE GOAL: Pay off Equipment Certificates using future positive performance and other fund balance that may be available. Create and implement a long term sustainable infrastructure plan (take a regionalistic approach when and where it makes sense) Create a public/private partnership funding strategy to achieve agreed upon city goals. By creating a naming rights policy and utilizing the City’s current donation policy, and working with and through the GV Community Foundation put together an ask game plan. The Park Director has started a list of possible needs in the area of equipment and naming rights for rooms in the new Community Center. This effort needs to be coordinated, targeted and professional. (Tim/Rick) Implement GARE goals and policies. In 2017, the City participated in GARE and as a result is recommending creating and implementing policies in the following areas:a)employment – expand efforts to recruit and retain a diverse workforce,b)city policies and documents – review and update where necessary to be sure there is no institutional bias at the very least and then explore if the City should be more proactive about wage (Davis-Bacon) and diversity requirements (minority owned businesses) around city projects,c)policing – determine if the City should do additional initiatives around race and equity. (Kirsten/Chief Jason/Marc/City Attorney Maria) Implement Green Step Cities Step III. The city is fully engaged in this program and has become our entrée into actions that are appropriate for cities to take in the environmental arena. There are costs to the City to move to the next step (mainly around the City purchasing more environmentally friendly items such as paper products, but also including LED lights and electric golf carts). Beyond the Green Step initiatives, there have been suggestions that the City work with some of our larger corporations (Honeywell, General Mills and Pentair) that have missions consistent with some of the ideals expressed. Again, a strategy needs to be created around this and an effort to get all interested parties to move forward together is essential. Some examples that have been raised include a vertical community garden, a windmill pilot project on city or other property (working with GM and Xcel), a larger solar garden project somewhere in the City, like a large roof top (Honeywell). (Marc/Eric E.) Implement the low to no cost and least difficult recommendations of the Bike and Ped Task Force (Marc) Resolve outstanding policy questions that will arise from the Recodification process (All) Implement housing policies as recommended by staff (Emily/Jason) Identify developable properties in the City and actively pursue appropriate and agreed upon development. Given the City’s financial situation and infrastructure needs, growing the tax base whenever possible should be a high priority. (Marc) Figure out an effective Volunteer Program (Kirsten/Rick/Cheryl) Create a thorough on boarding and off boarding process for Council members, board/commission members and city staff. (Kirsten) Consider annual joint meeting of Council and Boards and Commissions. (Council/Boards) Complete study around GV town center as well as LRT station.(Marc) Create Decola incentive policy (Jeff) Discuss LRT connector service around the City Consider a Council, staff, Community DISCUSSION around coordinated hauling. Also organics. (Council/Tim/Marc) Determine the City role in larger social issues. Many issues come to the local arena. In order for us to manage this, a philosophy should be determined. (Council/Tim) Image building -City/Council cohesiveness – review LMC elected officials info -Successful City supported events – Market, Art and Music, HSF fundraisers -City/HRC statement about diversity and inclusivity (vision statement) o City Citizens Academy (like PD) —I w M m ® O nj, X (D D p nm C) co 00tH 0- D (D6 -0o o CDQ n, V � ® -, C (D3 0- r S CD m r N (D Ln Ln 00 Ni ►w+ w 1p 00 Ln 00 N `< O� w 0T- O t.0O V -w w 00 O cn 0 0 0 -D a, O N N Ln �" w O ai O Ln 00 co � �_ N -ll 00 -1i-P CD N -�I 00 Ln w O CO O (rD N 00 O O 00 O O O O CO �G IL �-& -06 O O Ul O l0 O 00 00 o c 9' C/1 'p rt rt rt (D `G O � -�, fD Nk ®o x (D� D p n m n W co cn 0- D 70 CD r-- � ® o CD a, N 3 < C 3 r-trt m r- O`n (D CD 0_ p r* m N � (D Ln Ln Go r -ie "D W ;,D co (-n 00 N `G -D, O W W W W O 0) O -�I lD O �I W 0 W W 00 O Ul 0 0 0 (D O N a-` N U1 t� W M ai O N 00 � 0' cn (D 0�0 [D O N co WLn N �I 00 Ln W I'D CO O (DD O NJ 00 O 00 O O O O 00 s -N O O W co Ni 0 0 0 Nk O a O (J7 m M d m O e m Ak 8 m --i o x (D � D ® nm n00 00 Lf) > � r- -0 o o (Da, r r'' rt m FD E3 0- U' rt -a Z; o ® r -t CD rt 3 rt r N fD W W � W l0 00 u, 00 N .0 OV O l0 C:) W 0-- w W W 00 O (J7 ® O O -,J (D O N W cli O N� � N�� CT U-) O N 00 W 00 �j N W 1.0 4�` O N —Al 00 ® 00 M CC O O O O ® ® ® 00 �G N � N W 00 O 0 0 0 O a O (J7 m M d m O e m Ak 8 m Executive Summary Golden Valley Council/Manager Meeting September 12, 2017 Agenda Item 5. Future of Bicycle and Pedestrian Task Force Prepared By Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager Emily Goellner, Associate Planner/Grant Writer Summary As a result of City Council direction to staff to focus attention on an updated and improved Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan for the 2040 Comprehensive Plan, a Bicycle and Pedestrian Task Force was created in 2016 to help review community input, draft new goals and policies, and provide the evaluation of an updated Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan. This group met four times over eight months and worked closely with the City’s transportation engineering consultant to develop the content of a new plan. When this work was completed early in 2017, the Task Force provided the City Council with the components of a balanced and comprehensive bicycle and pedestrian network that will be incorporated into the Transportation Chapter of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan and implemented over the coming years. The final materials included a detailed list of recommended improvements as well as relative costs and potential funding partners (see attached). At the final meeting of the Task Force, the group voted (8-2) to recommend the City Council consider the establishment of a committee to monitor the implementation of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan. That recommendation is the basis for the current discussion. The products generated by the Bicycle and Pedestrian Task Force include two broad Goals for inclusion in the Comprehensive Plan, along with accompanying Objectives and Policies; a map of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Network (Existing and Proposed); and a policy plan to help guide staff with implementation of the improvements. Each chapter of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan will include an Implementation section, which will begin to detail how the various pieces of the plan will be carried out. For the proposed Bicycle and Pedestrian Network, this will consist of a near- term focus on marking and signing bicycle routes throughout the City as part of the regular street maintenance program and a long-term focus on including facilities for bicycles and pedestrians as larger infrastructure projects are funded and constructed. Much of the implementation of the greater proposed network will rely on the availability of funding and opportunities to partner with other organizations. At this time, staff feels that the hard work performed by the Task Force and the documents and tools provided should be sufficient to initiate the implementation of the Plan without the additional oversight of a newly established committee. Annual updates from staff on the progress of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan implementation, as well as on the other topics included for action in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan, could be considered as a way to monitor performance, to make adjustments to project priorities, and to shift Capital Improvement Plan dollars. Attachments •Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan Summary (1 page) •Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan (13 pages) •Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan Map (1 page)                                                                            CITY OF NEW H OPE CITY OF CRYSTAL CITY OF ROBBINSDALE C I T Y O F M I N N E A P O L I S CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK C I T Y O F M I N N E A P O L I S C I T Y O F S T . L O U I S P A R K C I T Y O F R O B B I N S D A L E CITY OF CRYSTAL CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK CI T Y O F C R Y S T A L CITY OF NEW H OPE C I T Y O F P L Y M O U T H C I T Y O F M I N N E A P O L I S CITY OFST. LOUIS PARK C I T Y O F P L Y M O U T H Laurel Ave Duluth St 10th Ave N Re g e n t A v e N No b l e A v e N Olympia St Western Ave Culver Rd 23rd Ave N Ke l l y D r Wayzata Blvd Knoll St Plymouth Ave N Su m t e r A v e N Pe n n s y l v a n i a A v e N N Frontage Rd S c o t t Qu e b e c A v e N Va l d e r s A v e N Country Club Dr 26th Ave N Sandburg Rd Za n e A v e N Manor D r Winsdale St Br u n s w i c k A v e N 34th Ave N Bo o n e A v e N Earl St Rd A v e N B r i d g e w a t e r R d Tryol T r a i l Fl o r i d a A v e N Ha n l e y R d Golden Hills Dr Lowry Ter Win n e t k a A v e S Xe r x e s A v e N In d e p e n d e n c e A v e N M a j o r D r Z e n i t h A v e N Fl a g A v e N W e s t w o o d D r S Westbend Rd Su m t e r A v e S Hampshire L n Or c h a r d A v e N Circle Down Lindsay St N o b l e D r Poplar Dr Av e Heights D r Heights Dr S Frontage R d D r e s d e n L n L e g e n d D r Fr o n t a g e R d B r o o k r i d g e A v e N Wi n n e t k a A v e N La w n T e r Na t c h e z A v e S Ge t t y s b u r g A v e N Market St Naper St De c a t u r A v e N O r e g o n A v e N Kewanee W ay Pe n n s y l v a n i a A v e S Dona Ln A r d m o r e D r G l e n w o o d P k w y Tryol T r a i l Westbrook Rd M c N a i r D r Phoenix St Ot t a w a A v e N Thotland Rd Wi s c o n s i n A v e N Uta h A v e S Je r s e y A v e S Bi e s D r Wi l l s P l Colon i al D r Ed g e w o o d A v e N BassettCree k D r Ad a i r A v e N Ju n e A v e S Ne v a d a A v e N Harold Ave B r o o k v i e w P k w y N Wynnwood Rd Le e A v e N Turners C r o s s r o a d N Aquil a A v e N Me n d e l s s o h n A v e N Br o o k v i e w P k w y S E l m daleRd M e a nderRd Je r s e y A v e N Sorell Ave Da k o t a A v e S Vista D r K y l e A v e N W i n d s o r W a y Av e S GoldenValley R o a d /C o u n t y R o a d 66 Hi g h w a y 1 0 0 Ros e Ma r y l a n d A v e N Alfred Rd Cortlawn Cir S Id a h o A v e N In d i a n a Av e N 7th Ave N Rh o d e I s l a n d A v e N Br u n s w i c k A v e S Z a n e A v e N B u r n t s i d e D r Roanoke Rd WoodstockAve P e r r y A v e N Av e N T r a i l Medle y L n Ge o r g i a A v e N Wally St Cut a c r o s s Rd Xe n i a A v e N Ha m p s h i r e Killarn e y D r Ke n t u c k y A v e S Ju n e A v e N Zeph y r P l Lo u i s i a n a A v e S C l o v e r L n C loverleafDr Clo v e r l e a f D r L i lacLoop Ma r y H i l l s D r F l o r i d a A v e S X y l o n A v e N D e c a t u r A v e N Kent u c k y A v e N TopelRd Yo r k Av e N GreenValley Rd C h a t e l a i n T e r Normandy B o n n i e L n Elgin Pl MerribeeDr Lo u i s i a n a A v e N DuluthLn Marie Ln E K a lt ernLn Or k l a D r L i l a c D r N T o l e d o A v e N M a rkayRidge Westbend Rd F a i r l a w n W a y G o l d e n V a l l e y R d Ne v a d a A v e S MarieLn W WestmoreWay WolfberryLn HamptonRd Yu k o n Ct Ha m p s h i r e Av e N KentleyAve Co r t l a w n C i r W Winnetka Or e g o n A v e S P l U n i t y A v e N B a s s e t t C reek Dr BassettCreek Ln M i nnaq u a D r T o l e d o A v e N W i n f i e l d A v e Un i t y A v e N B r e n n e r P a s s FaribaultSt ArcherAve N Ad e l i n e Ln Kingston Cir Golden Valley Dr Va r n e r Ci r Valders Ct Greenvie w Ln Ha m p s h i r e A v e N Winnetka Phoenix St Duluth St Wayzata Blvd W i s c o n s i n A ve N Adell A v e M a j o r A v e N Z e a l a n d A v e N E n s i g n A v e N Ke l l y D r Xe r x e s A v e N Knoll St Li l a c D r N Fl a g A v e N Rh o d e I s l a n d A v e N Plymouth Ave N Wayzata Blvd G o lden Valley R d Or k l a D r Wayzata Blvd Av e N Z e a l a n d A v e N S t C r o i x C i r L e e A v e N L a m p l i g h t e r L n Sandburg L n MadisonAve W Lewis R d Li l a c D r N HamptonRd Elgin Pl Bo o n e A v e N CircleDown Je r s e y A v e N Winsdale St Ot t a w a Av e N Olympia St Winnetka Heights Dr LilacDrN Lo u i s i a n a A v e N K y l e A v e N No b l e A v e M anor 10 t h A v e N R h o d e I s l a n d A v e S H a l f M o o n Dr O r d w a y Loring Ln Winsdale St Za n e A v e N Harold Ave Fl o r i d a Av e N Je r s e y Av e N P a r k v i e w T e r Phoenix St Wi s c o n s i n A v e N W a y zataBlvd Fr a n c e Av e N H i d d e n LakesP k w y Islan d D r TryolTrail Maryla n d A v e N Medicine Lake Road / County Road 70 B e t t y CrockerDr R i d g e w a y R d R h o d e I s l a n d A v e N Terrace L n Ca s t l e C t Fie l d In d i a n a A v e N Schaper Rd Colonial Rd 24th Ave N 27th Ave N Susse x Rd Ki n g H i l l R d C o n s t a n c e D r W 25th Ave N Sp r i n g Va l l e y C i r F r ontena cAve S ky l i n e D r Sk y l i n e D r HampshirePl C a v e l l A v e N Laurel Ave Sk i H i l l R d M e r i d i a n D r We s t e r n Lo u i s i a n a Av e N Co l o r a d o St Margare t D r Roanoke Cir C h e r o k e e Oa k G r o v e Q u e b e c A v e S KennethWay Wa s a t c h Ln W e l c o m e TyrolCrest Cortlawn Cir N Te r N a t c h e z A v e N B u r n t s i d e D r G o l d e n V a l l e y R d G e n e r a l M i l l s B l v d Ed g e w o o d A v e S Ed g e w o o d A v e S E l l i s L n Jonellen Ln WestwoodLn Gregory C r e s t v i e w A v e Co l o r a d o W i s c o n s i n A v e S Valley-woodCir Ma r y l a n d A v e S Medicine Lake Road / County Road 70 Schulle r Get t y s b u r g Ct Ver m o n t A v e S Fl o r i d a Ct MajorCir Pr i n c e t o n Av e S Valery R d Br o g g e r C i r GardenPark Qu a i l Av e N Or c h a r d Lo u i s i a n a A v e S Western Ave Pe r r y A v e N Id a h o A v e N Wayzat a B l v d Va l d e r s A v e N Va l d e r s A v e N Yo s e m i t e Av e N Winsdale St De c a t u r A v e N Na t c h e z Av e S Glenwood P k w y Ot t a w a Av e S Ed g e w o o d Av e N S p r i n g V a l l e y R dStCroixAveN W a t e r f o r d Dr Me n d e l s s o h n A v e N M a n c h e s t e r Dr HeritageCir StCroix Ave N W el c o m e Wi n n e t k a A v e n u e N o r t h / C o u n t y R o a d 1 5 6 Do u g l a s D r i v e / C o u n t y R o a d 1 0 2 1 Hi g h w a y 1 6 9 3 S F r o ntage Rd DuluthStreet /Count y R o ad 66 En s i g n A v e N Or c h a r d Av e N Id a h o A v e N Knoll WestbrookRd Winsdale St Bru n s w i c k Sc o t t A v e N Wynnwood Rd Hi l l s b o r o Av e N S unsetRid g e Dr Q u e bec St O t t a w a A v e S A n g e l o D r WoodlandTrail H i d d e n L a k e s P k w y WinsdaleSt A l p i n e Pa s s AvondaleRd Do u g l a s A ve Q u e n t i n A v e S R a v i n e M a d d ausLn Ln Ky l e P l Un i t y A v e N T o l e d o A v e N S p r u c e T r Wes t c h e s t e r C i r Cir Ct W a t e r f o r d Sc o t t A v e NDawnview Ter Dawnview Ter C o n s t a n c e D r E Li l a c D r N Plymouth Ave N W i s c o n s i n A v e N Medley Rd 6 P a i s l e y L n G lendenTer Pl No b l e A v e N Ter Byr d A v e N Parkvie w B lv d York A v e N M e a d o w L n S Li l a c D r N A v e N Duluth St Patsy Ln 2 3 H i l l s b o r o INDEX1 - English Cir2 - Kings Valley Rd3 - Kings Valley Rd E4 - Kings Valley Rd W5 - Marquis Rd6 - Mayfair Rd7 - Stroden Cir8 - Tamarin Tr CarriagePath Mendelss o h n Ln N V a l e C r e s t R d Cir Cir T y r o l Trail Janalyn Cir Glencrest Rd J a n a lyn Cir StrawberryLn W e s t w o o d D r N Be verly A v e Leber S u n n y r i d g e L n Me a d o w L n N M e a d o w L n N D a h l b e r g D r Woodstock Ave Lilac D r N N Frontage R d Heath-brookeCir LegendLn Bassett C r e e k Dr Glenwood Avenue /Co u n t y R o a d 4 0 W e l c o m e Av e N We s l e y Co m m o n s D r T h e o d o r e W i r t h P k w y Q u a i l A v e N P e r r y A v e N Q u a i l A v e N R e g e n t A v e N ScottA v e N 33rd Ave N L o wry Drake R d T r it onDr GlenwoodAve P e n n s y l v a n i a A v e N G o l d e n V a l l e y R d Julianne Ter WesleyDr 4 5 6 7 8 8 2 2 A v e N Zeala n d Ave N Z e a l a n d A v e N A q u i l a A v e N Aq u i l a A v e N Ma n d a n Av e N Plymouth Ave N O r k l a D r Knol l S t Orkla Dr Va l d e r s A v e N M edley Cir AveS EwaldT e r K i n g C r e e k R d H aroldAve LoringLn Woodstock A v e Yosemite C i r Y o s e m i t e A v e N X e n i a A v e S Tu r n e r s C r o s s r o a d S RadissonRd Turnpi k e R d TurnpikeRd B a s s e tt Cre e k B l v d Paisley Ln PaisleyLn Alley Al l e y H i g h w a y 1 0 0 Hi g h w a y 1 6 9 Interstate-394 / Highway 12 Interstate-394 / Highway 12 Highway 55 / Olson Memorial HighwayHighway 55 / Olson Memorial Highway Highway 55 / Ols o n M e m o r i a l H i g h w a y !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !(!(!(!( !( !(!( !( !(!(!( !( !( !( !( !( !(!( !( !( !( !(!(!( !( !(!( !( !( !( !( ä ä ä ä ä ä ä ä ä ä ä ä ä ä ä ä ä ää 456766 456770 456766 456740 456740 4567156 4567102 §¨¦394 §¨¦394 Æÿ55Æÿ55 Æÿ100 Æÿ100 £¤169 £¤169 0 0.4 0.80.2 Miles BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN NETWORKEXISTING AND PROPOSED BIKEWAYS AND SIDEWALKS ä Connects to Trail Systemin Adjacent City !( Identified IntersectionsFor Potential CrossingTreatments !(Multi-Use Trail Connection Bike Lane Enhanced Sharrow Multi-Use Trail Regional Multi-Use Trail Protected Bikeway Signed Bike Route Facility Type TBD To Be Constructed (2017-2018) Sidewalk Existing Paved Trails,Sidewalks, & Bikeways Local Trails and Sidewalks Regional Trails Unpaved Trails I       Date: 6/28/2017Time: 4:26:20 PM AGENDA Regular Meeting of the City Council Golden Valley City Hall 7800 Golden Valley Road Council Chamber September 19, 2017 6:30 pm 1.CALL TO ORDER PAGES A.Pledge of Allegiance B.Roll Call 2.ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS TO AGENDA 3.CONSENT AGENDA Approval of Consent Agenda - All items listed under this heading are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no discussion of these items unless a Council Member so requests in which event the item will be removed from the general order of business and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. A.Approval of Minutes - 1. Council/Manager - August 8, 2017 2. Special Council/Manager - August 15, 2017 2. City Council Meeting - September 5, 2017 B.Approval of City Check Register C.Licenses: 1. Approve Beer/Wine requests at Brookview Park D.Minutes: E.Bids and Quotes F.Agreement with City of Minneapolis for the Toward Zero Deaths Grant Program G.Set Public Hearing Date for Proposed Property Tax Levy Payable 2018 and 2018 Budget 12/5/17 H.Board and Commission Appointments 4.PUBLIC HEARINGS A.Public Hearing - General Land Use Map Amendment - 5509 Lindsay Street - Open/Close Public Hearing B.Public Hearing - Zoning Map Amendment - 5509 Lindsay Street - Open/Close Public Hearing C.Public Hearing - General Land Use Map Amendment - 1611 Lilac Drive North - Open/Close Public Hearing D.Public Hearing - Zoning Map Amendment - 1611 Lilac Drive North - Open/Close Public Hearing E.Public Hearing - Minor Subdivision - 7200 Harold Avenue F.Public Hearing - Conditional Use Permit - 6960 Madison Avenue West 5.OLD BUSINESS 6.NEW BUSINESS A.Mixed Income Housing Policy B.Super Bowl Law Enforcement Agreement C.Adopting Proposed 2018-19 Budget and Tax Levy Payable in 2018 17- D.Review of Council Calendar E.Mayor and Council Communications 7.ADJOURNMENT AGENDA Regular Meeting of the City Council Golden Valley City Hall 7800 Golden Valley Road Council Chamber October 3, 2017 6:30 pm 1.CALL TO ORDER PAGES A.Pledge of Allegiance B.Roll Call 2.ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS TO AGENDA 3.CONSENT AGENDA Approval of Consent Agenda - All items listed under this heading are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no discussion of these items unless a Council Member so requests in which event the item will be removed from the general order of business and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. A.Approval of Minutes: City Council Meeting September 19, 2017 B.Approval of City Check Register C.Licenses: D.Minutes: E.Bids and Quotes: F.Appointment of Election Judges and Absentee Ballot Board for the General Election on November 7, 2017 G.Call for Special Council Meeting to Canvass the 2017 Election Results on November 14, 2017 H.Waiver of Public Hearing and Certification of Special Assessments - 2017 PMP Sanitary Sewer Repairs I.Waiver of Public Hearing and Certification of Special Assessments - 2017 Sewer Repairs located in Douglas Drive Project Area J.Approval of Plat - 7200 Harold Ave (tentative) 4.PUBLIC HEARINGS A.Public Hearing - Special Assessments - 2017 Delinquent Utility Bills B.Public Hearing - Special Assessments - 2017 Miscellaneous Charges C.Public Hearing - General Land Use Map Amendment - 5509 Lindsay Street D.Public Hearing - Zoning Map Amendment - 5509 Lindsay Street E.Public Hearing - General Land Use Map Amendment - 1611 Lilac Drive North F.Public Hearing - Zoning Map Amendment - 1611 Lilac Drive North 5.OLD BUSINESS 6.NEW BUSINESS A.Approve Contract with EDG and Brookview B.Authorize Submittal of Application for Hennepin County Grant 17- C.Review of Council Calendar D.Mayor and Council Communications 7.ADJOURNMENT A G E N D A Council/Manager Meeting Golden Valley City Hall 7800 Golden Valley Road Council Conference Room October 10, 2017 6:30 pm Pages 1. Annual Meeting with Golden Valley Community Foundation ( minutes) 2. Police Body Cameras (15 minutes) 3. Climate Action Plan ( minutes) 4. Douglas Drive Redevelopment Discussion ( minutes) 5. Procedure - Board & Commission Appointment ( minutes) 6. Council Review of Future Draft Agendas: City Council October 17, City Council November 8 and Council Manager November 21, 2017 Council/Manager meetings have an informal, discussion-style format and are designed for the Council to obtain background information, consider policy alternatives, and provide general directions to staff. No formal actions are taken at these meetings. The public is invited to attend Council/Manager meetings and listen to the discussion; public participation is allowed by invitation of the City Council.